| Page 1 of 6
Pulido vs. People (2021)
Summary Cases:
Subject
: A judicial declaration of absolute nullity of either the first and second marriages obtained by theaccused is considered a valid defense in bigamy; Bigamy - Definition and Elements; Prior to theeffectivity of the Family Code, a void
ab initio
marriage can be raised as a defense in a bigamy caseeven without a judicial declaration of its nullity; Article 40 of the Family Code applies retroactively tomarriages celebrated before the Family Code insofar as it does not prejudice or impair vested or acquired rights. Thus, judicial declaration of nullity is required for prior marriages contracted before theeffectivity of the Family Code but only for purposes of remarriage; Subsequent declaration of the nullityof the first and second marriages constitute a valid defense in bigamy; Retroactive effects of a void
abinitio
marriage in criminal prosecutions for bigamy; Article 40 of the Family Code requires a judicialdeclaration of absolute nullity for purposes of remarriage but not as a defense in bigamy. Article 40 didnot amend or repeal Article 349 of the RPC; Penal laws are strictly construed against the State andliberally in favor of the accused;
Facts
:On September 5, 1983, then 16-year old Luisito G. Pulido (petitioner) married his teacher, then 22-year old Nora S. Arcon (private complainant) in a civil ceremony in Cavite. The couple lived together until2007 when Pulido stopped going home to their conjugal dwelling. When confronted by Arcon, Pulidoadmitted to his affair with Rowena Baleda. Arcon likewise learned that Pulido and Baleda entered intomarriage on July 31, 1995 which was solemnized by Reverend Conrado P. Ramos and their MarriageCertificate indicated Pulido's civil status as single. Arcon charged Pulido and Baleda with Bigamy on December 4, 2007. In his defense, Pulido insisted thathe could not be held criminally liable for bigamy because both his marriages were null and void. Heclaimed that his marriage with Arcon in 1983 is null and void for lack of a valid marriage license while hismarriage with Baleda is null and void for lack of a marriage ceremony.Baleda, claimed that she only knew of Pulido's prior marriage with Arcon sometime in April 2007. Shealleged that even prior to the filing of the bigamy case, she already filed a Petition to Annul her marriagewith Pulido before the RTC. In a Decision dated October 25, 2007, the RTC declared her marriage withPulido as null and void for being bigamous in nature. This ruling attained finality,The RTC convicted Pulido of Bigamy and acquitted Baleda. As to the first marriage, the RTC noted thatthe certifications issued by the Civil Registrar merely proved that the marriage license and marriageapplication could not be found, not that they never existed or were never issued. It held that the marriagecertificate which reflected on its face the marriage license number of Pulido and Arcon's marriage has ahigher probative value than the certifications issued by the Civil Registrar. Thus, the RTC upheld thevalidity of Pulido's marriage with Arcon.On appeal, the Court of Appeals (CA) sustained Pulido's conviction but modified the penalty. The CAapplied Article 40 of the Family Code and ruled that even assuming that the first marriage was void for lack of a marriage license, one may still be held liable for bigamy if he/she enters into a subsequentmarriage without first obtaining a judicial declaration of nullity of the prior marriage. Moreover, thesubsequent judicial declaration of the second marriage for being bigamous in nature does not bar theprosecution of Pulido for the crime of bigamy. Motion for Reconsideration was denied. Hence, thisPetition for Review on
Certiorari
under Rule 45.
| Page 2 of 6Meanwhile, on June 29, 2016, the RTC issued the Decree of Absolute Nullity of Marriage betweenPulido and Arcon.
Held
: Pulido is Acquitted from Bigamy
A judicial declaration of absolute nullity of either the first and second marriages obtained by theaccused is considered a valid defense in bigamy
1. For resolution of this Court is the subsequent judicial declaration of the absolute nullity of Pulido's firstmarriage with Arcon which he presented as a defense in the criminal prosecution for bigamy against him.This case provides us the opportune occasion to revisit and examine our earlier pronouncements that a judicial declaration of the absolute nullity of a prior void
ab initio
marriage secured prior to remarriage isrequired before a prior void
ab initio
marriage may be considered a valid defense in the prosecution of bigamy.2. After a careful scrutiny of the records and rigorous reexamination of the applicable law and jurisprudence, we find that there is enough basis to abandon our earlier pronouncement and now holdthat a
void
ab initio
marriage is
a valid defense
in the prosecution for bigamy
even without a judicialdeclaration of absolute nullity. Consequently,
a judicial declaration of absolute nullity of either thefirst and second marriages obtained by the accused is considered a valid defense in bigamy.Bigamy - Definition and Elements
3. Article 349 of the Revised Penal Code (RPC) defines and penalizes Bigamy. The rationale for prosecuting an individual who contracted a second or subsequent marriage before the former marriagehas been legally dissolved, or before the absent spouse has been declared, presumptively dead, is topreserve and ensure the juridical tie of marriage established by law.4. For one to be held guilty of bigamy, the prosecution must prove the following: (a) that the offender hasbeen legally married; (b) that the first marriage has not been legally dissolved, or in case his or her spouse is absent, the absent spouse could not yet be presumed dead according to the Civil Code; (c)that he or she contracts a second or subsequent marriage; and (d) that the second or subsequentmarriage has all the essential requisites for validity. it is vital in the prosecution for bigamy that thealleged second marriage, having all the essential requirements, would be valid were it not for thesubsistence of the first marriage.5. Pulido married Arcon on September 5, 1983. Thereafter, he contracted a second marriage withBaleda on July 31, 1995 without having his first marriage with Arcon legally dissolved. Pulido andBaleda's marriage has all the essential requisites for validity had it not for the existing first marriage.Thereafter, Pulido's first marriage with Arcon and second marriage with Baleda were judicially declaredvoid for lack of a valid marriage license and for being bigamous, respectively.
Prior to the effectivity of the Family Code, a void
ab initio
marriage can be raised as a defense in abigamy case even without a judicial declaration of its nullity
6. Prior to the effectivity of the Family Code, the Court has inconsistent pronouncements concerning thenecessity of a judicial declaration of nullity of the prior void marriage as a defense in a bigamy case.Under the case law, when both the prior and subsequent marriages were contracted prior to theeffectivity of the Family Code, a void
ab initio
marriage can be raised as a defense in a bigamy caseeven without a judicial declaration of its nullity. Nonetheless, the Court recognized that an action for
nullity of the second marriage is a prejudicial question to the criminal prosecution for bigamy.
| Page 3 of 6
Article 40 of the Family Code applies retroactively to marriages celebrated before the FamilyCode insofar as it does not prejudice or impair vested or acquired rights. Thus, judicialdeclaration of nullity is required for prior marriagescontracted before the effectivity of the Family Code but only for purposes of remarriage.
7. Upon the enactment of the Family Code on August 3, 1988, the doctrine laid down in
Gomez,Consuegra and Wiegel
that there is a need for a judicial declaration of nullity of a prior "void" marriagewas encapsulated in Article 40, Family Code. The prevailing rule, therefore, is that even if the marriage isvoid, a final judgment declaring it void for purposes of remarriage is required. Parties to a marriageshould not be permitted to judge for themselves its nullity; only competent courts have such authority8. When the prior marriage was contracted prior to the effectivity of the Family Code while thesubsequent marriage was contracted during the effectivity of the said law, we recognize the retroactiveapplication of Article 40 of the Family Code
but only insofar as it does not prejudice or impair vestedor acquired rights.
9.
Article 40 has retroactive application
on marriages contracted prior to the effectivity of the FamilyCode
but only for the purpose of remarriage
, as the parties are not permitted to judge for themselvesthe nullity of their marriage. In other words, in order to remarry, a judicial declaration of nullity is requiredfor prior marriages contracted before the effectivity of the Family Code. Without a judicial declaration of absolute nullity of the first marriage having been obtained, the second marriage is rendered void
ab initio
even though the first marriage is also considered void
ab initio
. The only basis for establishing thevalidity of the second marriage is the judicial decree of nullity of the first marriage.10. However, in a
criminal prosecution for bigamy, the
parties may still raise the defense of a void
abinitio
marriage even without obtaining a judicial declaration of absolute nullity of the firstmarriage celebrated before the effectivity of the Family Code.
Such is still governed by the rulings inMendoza, Aragon and Odayat which are more in line with the rule that procedural rules are only givenretroactive effect insofar as they do not prejudice or impair vested or acquired rights.11. In this case, Pulido's first marriage with Arcon was contracted in 1983 or before the effectivity of theFamily Code while his second marriage with Baleda was celebrated in 1995, during the effectivity of thesaid law. Hence, Pulido is required to obtain a judicial decree of absolute nullity of his prior void
ab initio
marriage but only for purposes of remarriage. As regards the
bigamy case, however, Pulido may raisethe defense of a void
ab initio
marriage even without obtaining a judicial declaration of absolutenullity.Subsequent declaration of the nullity of the first and second marriages constitute a valid defensein bigamy
12. The existing rule is that a judicial declaration of nullity of the second marriage is not a valid defensein bigamy nor a prejudicial question to a criminal action for bigamy. Now, this Court has the timelyopportunity to review and revisit the rationale of our earlier pronouncements, and therefore, adopt amore liberal view in favor of the accused.13. After a careful consideration, this Court is constrained to abandon our earlier rulings that a judicialdeclaration of absolute nullity of the first and/or second marriages cannot be raised as a defense by theaccused in a criminal prosecution for bigamy. We hold that a judicial declaration of absolute nullity is notnecessary to prove a void
ab initio
prior and subsequent marriages in bigamy case. Consequently,
a judicial declaration of absolute nullity of the first and/or second marriages presented by theaccused in the prosecution for bigamy is a valid defense,
| Page 4 of 6
they are secured
.14. The aforesaid conclusion is anchored on and justified by the retroactive effects of a void
ab initio
marriage, the legislative intent of Article 40 of the Family Code and the fundamental rules of constructiongoverning penal laws.
Retroactive effects of a void
ab initio
marriage in criminal prosecutions for bigamy
15. We ruled in
Niñal v. Bayadog
that under ordinary circumstances, the effect of a void marriage, so far as concerns the conferment of legal rights upon the parties, is as though no marriage had ever takenplace. A void marriage produces no legal effects except those declared by law. And therefore, beinggood for no legal purpose, its invalidity can be maintained in any proceeding in which the fact of marriage may be material, either direct or collateral, in any civil court between any parties at any time,whether before or after the death of either or both the husband and the wife. Jurisprudence under theCivil Code states that no judicial decree is necessary in order to establish the nullity of a marriage; theexception to this is Article 40 of the Family Code, which expressly provides that there must be a judicialdeclaration of the nullity of a previous marriage, though void, and such absolute nullity can be based onlyon a final judgment to that effect. However, it must be borne in mind that the requirement of
Article 40 ismerely for purposes of remarriage and does not affect the accused's right to collaterally attackthe validity of the void
ab initio
marriage in criminal prosecution for bigamy
.16. In contrast, voidable marriages under Article 45 of the Family Code are considered valid andproduces all its civil effects until it is set aside by a competent court in an action for annulment. it iscapable of ratification and cannot be assailed collaterally except in a direct proceeding it is consideredvalid during its subsistence and only ceases upon the finality of the decree of annulment of a competentcourt.17. Cleary, when the first marriage is void
ab initio
, one of the essential element of bigamy is, i.e. a prior valid marriage. There can be no crime when the very act which was penalized by the law, i.e. contractinganother marriage during the subsistence of a prior legal or valid marriage, is not present. The existenceand the validity of the first marriage being an essential element of the crime, of bigamy, it is but logicalthat a conviction for said offense cannot be sustained where there is no first marriage to begin with. Thus,
an accused in a bigamy case should be allowed to raise the defense of a prior void
ab initiomarriage through competent evidence other than the judicial decree of nullity
.18. Apropos, with the retroactive effects of a void
ab initio
marriage, there is nothing to annul nor dissolve as the judicial, declaration of nullity merely confirms the inexistence of such marriage. Thus, thesecond element of bigamy, i.e. that the former marriage has not been legally dissolved or annulled, iswanting in case of void
ab initio
prior marriage. The term "former marriage" in the second element of bigamy refers to voidable or valid marriages which may be dissolved by annulment or divorce,respectively (under Spanish law where RPC was patterned). In effect, when the accused contracts asecond marriage without having the first marriage dissolved or annulled, the crime of bigamy isconsummated as the valid or voidable first marriage still subsists without a decree of annulment by acompetent court. in contrast, when the first marriage is void
ab initio,
the accused cannot be held liablefor bigamy as the judicial declaration of its nullity is not tantamount to annulment nor dissolution butmerely a declaration of a status or condition that no such marriage exists.19. In the same manner, when the accused contracts a second or subsequent marriage that is void
abinitio,
other than it being bigamous, he/she cannot be held liable for bigamy as the effect of a voidmarriage signifies that the accused has not entered into a second or subsequent marriage, beinginexistent from the beginning. Thus, the element, "that he or she
contracts a second or subsequent